Trump

[Alan]

Capitalist economies, in their purest form, are also socially repressive.

No doubt.

 

[Walshes Wolves]

The tarrifs trump is imposing will make anything manufactured in USA more expensive. The reason they import steel and aluminium is because it's cheaper than sourcing within the US. Whichever outcome manufacturers go for (import at a 25% premium or source domestically) their raw materials are going to cost more, and who will end up footing the bill? The American consumer. (Because reciprocal tarrifs will make us made goods seem more expensive).

I still haven't read or heard one criticism from the people who are complaining against Trump's Tariffs, about when the EU were charging 4 times higher tarrifs than the US to import cars.

 

[Walshes Wolves]

Economically speaking, they’ve gotten the balance pretty close to ideal. How inextricable that is from their, er, “other policies” is difficult to say from the outside but always worth caveating. But in vacuum from that, more countries should be studying how China manages its resources and directs them toward its goals.

If there is a way to marry Command and Capital economies with a less socially repressive regime, it could offer some ways forward.

Using state capital to steal poor countries resources is no way forward.

 

[Alan]

Using state capital to steal poor countries resources is no way forward.

Not that I disagree, but we’ve been doing that for actual centuries. We’re no saints, neither country.

 

[AndyWolves]

I still haven't read or heard one criticism from the people who are complaining against Trump's Tariffs, about when the EU were charging 4 times higher tarrifs than the US to import cars.

It was to protect EU car manufacturing as has been explained to you numerous times.

It's not the same as what trump is doing, as has been explained numerous times. The EU tarrifs on cars hasn't broken the financial markets, it hasn't broken EU manufacturing costs, and hasn't broken international trade

 

[Walshes Wolves]

Not that I disagree, but we’ve been doing that for actual centuries. We’re no saints, neither country.

I don't think anyone says we are or ever have been saints, but using China as an example

It was to protect EU car manufacturing as has been explained to you numerous times.

It's not the same as what trump is doing, as has been explained numerous times. The EU tarrifs on cars hasn't broken the financial markets, it hasn't broken EU manufacturing costs, and hasn't broken international trade

It obviously was not OK for the US to be paying four times more tarrifs to export their cars to the US. It was not good for the US car industry, or their workers.
I am also saying, that, you can't argue that tarrifs are bad for business and at the same time charge a country four times higher tarrifs on cars.
What Von de Leyen is really saying is, she has no problem with tarrifs, when it is in her favour, but doesn't like it when the US charge the EU more than the EU charges the US.

 

[leedswolf]

Stock markets tumble as Trump tariffs loom

Markets in Asia and Europe fell as hopes of another delay or a solution faded.

news.sky.com

 

[AndyWolves]

I don't think anyone says we are or ever have been saints, but using China as an example


It obviously was not OK for the US to be paying four times more tarrifs to export their cars to the US. It was not good for the US car industry, or their workers.
I am also saying, that, you can't argue that tarrifs are bad for business and at the same time charge a country four times higher tarrifs on cars.
What Von de Leyen is really saying is, she has no problem with tarrifs, when it is in her favour, but doesn't like it when the US charge the EU more than the EU charges the US.

You can absolutely argue that the tariffs imposed by trump are bad for business, because they have been. They are sparking trade wars which will be damaging for everyone.

It's the manner in which the tariffs have been imposed that is so destructive and the narrative that's gone with them. It's hurt everyone, including the US.

It would have been much less damaging to announce and then plan tariffs that step-up over a number of years instead of dropping a 25% tariff out of nowhere (along with the narrative that's gone with these tariffs too)

 

[AndyWolves]

Stock markets tumble as Trump tariffs loom

Markets in Asia and Europe fell as hopes of another delay or a solution faded.

news.sky.com

It's not bad for business though because the EU charge tariffs too

 

[Walshes Wolves]

You can absolutely argue that the tariffs imposed by trump are bad for business, because they have been. They are sparking trade wars which will be damaging for everyone.

It's the manner in which the tariffs have been imposed that is so destructive and the narrative that's gone with them. It's hurt everyone, including the US.

It would have been much less damaging to announce and then plan tariffs that step-up over a number of years instead of dropping a 25% tariff out of nowhere (along with the narrative that's gone with these tariffs too)

The EU car tarrifs have been hurting the US car industry for years.

 

[nimrod]

i saw this a few weeks back - Q&A on tariffs, admittedly from EU so if any of it is incorrect I'm sure someone will say. I've done next to no research!

you can do a lot with numbers to make something look bad for one side vs another if you're that way inclined. I assume the four times tariff mentioned in the thread on cars relates to 2.5% US vs the 10% EU rate referred in the article. In which case the four times would amount to only a 7.5% difference (if true), a lot lower than the 25% "remedy".

The Q&A also notes there was a 25% pre-existing US tariff on pickup trucks which is a third of the US market. This might be a misleading attempt at justification of existing tariffs but interesting that 33%*25% + 67%*2.5% would give an overall rate of 9.925%.

The bigger picture based on the link would suggest that overall trade is relatively even noting the large surplus the US takes in the Services sector.

Questions and Answers on the US reciprocal tariff policy

What is the current value of EU-US trade and investment? Total bilateral trade in goods reached €851 billion in 2023. The EU exported €503 billion of goods to the US market, while importing €347 bill

ec.europa.eu

 

[Walshes Wolves]

i saw this a few weeks back - Q&A on tariffs, admittedly from EU so if any of it is incorrect I'm sure someone will say. I've done next to no research!

you can do a lot with numbers to make something look bad for one side vs another if you're that way inclined. I assume the four times tariff mentioned in the thread on cars relates to 2.5% US vs the 10% EU rate referred in the article. In which case the four times would amount to only a 7.5% difference (if true), a lot lower than the 25% "remedy".

The Q&A also notes there was a 25% pre-existing US tariff on pickup trucks which is a third of the US market. This might be a misleading attempt at justification of existing tariffs but interesting that 33%*25% + 67%*2.5% would give an overall rate of 9.925%.

The bigger picture based on the link would suggest that overall trade is relatively even noting the large surplus the US takes in the Services sector.

Questions and Answers on the US reciprocal tariff policy

What is the current value of EU-US trade and investment? Total bilateral trade in goods reached €851 billion in 2023. The EU exported €503 billion of goods to the US market, while importing €347 bill

ec.europa.eu

I find it easy to critise Trump in general and his tarrifs. I just find that someone who critises him, turns a blind eye, when the people they support have been doing the very thing, that they are now complaining about.
It is like a few people just follow the party line and can't think for themselves and are just fed propaganda and continuously repeat the official line.

 

[AndyWolves]

I find it easy to critise Trump in general and his tarrifs. I just find that someone who critises him, turns a blind eye, when the people they support have been doing the very thing, that they are now complaining about.
It is like a few people just follow the party line and can't think for themselves and are just fed propaganda and continuously repeat the official line.

Did you read the article?

 

[darlowolf64]

I find it easy to critise Trump in general and his tarrifs. I just find that someone who critises him, turns a blind eye, when the people they support have been doing the very thing, that they are now complaining about.
It is like a few people just follow the party line and can't think for themselves and are just fed propaganda and continuously repeat the official line.

I hate to just reply with a laughing emoji so...

You say that anyone who raises concerns about Trump is "following the party line/believing the propaganda" whilst falling for the Trump/MAGA tropes yourself.

I really don't know where you stand on this, Pro-Trump or just Anti-EU but I think it clouds your judgement and you seem unwilling to actually accept or compare the Tariffs argument. Having pre-set agreements with a Country in regards to what taxes will be levied against them when exporting things in not the same as a man-child having a hissyfit and throwing large tariffs at half the World and throwing the financial markets into a meltdown

 

[jd1981]

To sum up the American president shouldn’t be having a daily news slot in the UK because what he or one of his minions has done or said. It’s becoming like the equivalent of a mock fly on the wall documentary except this is real life.

 

[nimrod]

I find it easy to critise Trump in general and his tarrifs. I just find that someone who critises him, turns a blind eye, when the people they support have been doing the very thing, that they are now complaining about.
It is like a few people just follow the party line and can't think for themselves and are just fed propaganda and continuously repeat the official line.

i'd be interested to understand which bits of that EU Q&A are demonstrably false and you'd imagine it would be easy for the US to be able to refute. Maybe someone has already?

But I could totally understand that the US, in wanting to protect their 'iconic' pickup truck market, would have been willing in past discussions to accept a higher tariff on other vehicles with the overall balanced tariff structure across the whole sector being about the same (10%). Surely, if that is the case, it would then be unreasonable if either party bitched and moaned about being short changed either relating to the pickup truck market tariffs if you're the EU or the residual car market tariffs if you're the US, which is what Trump seems to be doing.

I've not followed this thread recently so I don't know if you're commenting about other posters but I can't see that has anything to do with my post.

 

[Walshes Wolves]

I hate to just reply with a laughing emoji so...

You say that anyone who raises concerns about Trump is "following the party line/believing the propaganda" whilst falling for the Trump/MAGA tropes yourself.

I really don't know where you stand on this, Pro-Trump or just Anti-EU but I think it clouds your judgement and you seem unwilling to actually accept or compare the Tariffs argument. Having pre-set agreements with a Country in regards to what taxes will be levied against them when exporting things in not the same as a man-child having a hissyfit and throwing large tariffs at half the World and throwing the financial markets into a meltdownsure where I said many?

Not sure where I said many? I quiet clearly wrote in the second paragraph, a few follow the party line. I also am not defending Trump's actions, I have made clear on many posts what I think of him. I am saying that there are double standards on tarrifs and that to me is undeniable.
I don't believe in standing with a party or a person. I believe in policies that affect people in general and when I think something is unjust or hypocritical, in my opinion of course, I call it out.
If Wolves play shit or another team deserved to win, I will say it as it is.

 

[darlowolf64]

Not sure where I said many? I quiet clearly wrote in the second paragraph, a few follow the party line. I also am not defending Trump's actions, I have made clear on many posts what I think of him. I am saying that there are double standards on tarrifs and that to me is undeniable.
I don't believe in standing with a party or a person. I believe in policies that affect people in general and when I think something is unjust or hypocritical, in my opinion of course, I call it out.
If Wolves play shit or another team deserved to win, I will say it as it is.

But you won't/can't differentiate between agreed, negotiated agreements between the US and Europe with regards to reciprocal tariffs to protect their own interests and (as you've used cars) their motor industries, you just say that the EU did it first... These were negotiated, not enforced. There is a difference

 

[Walshes Wolves]

Trump's tariffs – how should the EU react?

The ‘Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Plan’ proposed by Donald Trump sounds innocuous but is a roadmap towards an all-out global trade war. To avert one, Europe must act firmly and speedily.

www.cer.eu

 

[Alan]

Trump's tariffs – how should the EU react?

The ‘Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Plan’ proposed by Donald Trump sounds innocuous but is a roadmap towards an all-out global trade war. To avert one, Europe must act firmly and speedily.

www.cer.eu

Weird article that amounts to “yeah these are awful but let’s go with appeasement”.